4 ms·

Nah, it's not Ubuntu problem, it just happens because software is complex. It depends on so many factors and things like Debian break just as often. I've perso

Nah, it's not Ubuntu problem, it just happens because software is complex. It depends on so many factors and things like Debian break just as often. I've personally had the same install across six Ubuntu installs in total and I know other people like that as well. Anecdotal experience but so is claiming Ubuntu's breakage ratio is higher.

acqq 7y ago
It is surely not anecdotal and telling about "people I know" but the top comment of this thread for Lubuntu 20.04 LTS: "the Lubuntu team does not support upgrading from 18.04 or below to any greater release. Doing so will result in a broken system. If you are on 18.04 or below and would like to upgrade, please do a fresh install." Note that 18.04 was also LTS, so whoever tries to upgrade from one LTS to another, will probably be able to start the process (like before) but at the end will with huge probability be better off just biting the bullet... and fresh install. If the "people you know" upgrade faster then LTS to LTS they won't see a problem this time. But being able to upgrade from one LTS to the next LTS is completely reasonable user expectation. I don't even want to try to prove that it will be broken this time.
- Avamander 7y ago
  > but the top comment of this thread for Lubuntu 20.04 LTS: The one I replied to said Ubuntu not Lubuntu. Big difference.
c0l0 7y ago
No, Debian releases do not "break just as often". If you really couldn't got from release n to n+1 via apt(-get|itude) due to new packages migrating into testing, this would be a release-critical bug, and have to be corrected before the n+1 release were to be marked stable. There are certain situations where a Debian upgrade will break a specific package - maybe due to upstream messing up really badly, or maybe due to some unusual way of configuring it. But in that case, the release notes that Debian publishes for each release would cover that particular problem for sure. Mistakes happen, and noone's perfect - but Debian tries to be, and they're very near that ideal in terms of ensuring your ability to upgrade your installation.
- dmz73 7y ago
  Fir me Debian releases are broken to start with. Fresh install of 10.3 resulted in gnome desktop that could not use gui sudo and some package with broken dependencies. Replaced with xubuntu that just worked. This was not the first time I tried Debian with similar results. The "stable" part just means that they distribute an old version of some software and not that it all works.
- waltpad 7y ago
  I thought Debian also moved to a fixed schedule release policy? Doesn't it make it harder to stick to a "release when ready"? Personally, I don't think that Ubuntu is less perfect that Debian wrt. upgrade quality, it's just that (it seems to me that) the workforce is not as large, and that they also have other projects on their plate (not to say it should be that way or not, I'm merely trying to state the facts).
  - pvorb 7y ago
    No, it makes "release when ready" easier, since the entire distribution doesn't have to wait for that single software release becau the next distro release is not that far away. At least that's how it works for Java. (I'm not that deep into Linux distros.)
    - waltpad 7y ago
      How is that supposed to work? I understand that it possible to pull the plug on packages which are not ready at time T, but it also means pulling the plug on all the packages that depend on it. So if libreoffice depends on package P, and that one is not ready, is Debian going to simply drop libreoffice until next release?
      - jlarocco 7y ago
        Nothing is dropped. At a very high level, it works like this: New versions of stuff go into Unstable. When they've been tested a while they get pushed to Testing. Periodically Testing is frozen and branched into a new Stable release. If a package doesn't make it into Testing before the freeze then it's out of luck and has to wait for the next release. For example, assume libreoffice 1.0 and libfoo 1.0 are in Unstable, Testing and Stable. If libreoffice 1.1 comes out and depends on libfoo 1.1, but libfoo 1.1 is broken in Unstable, then libfoo 1.1 and libreoffice 1.1 won't be pushed to Testing until the issue is fixed. If they don't make it into Testing before the release freeze then the next stable will ship with libreoffice 1.0. After the freeze, when the libfoo 1.1 is fixed in Unstable, then libreoffice 1.1 and libfoo 1.1 will go into Testing and wait for the next Stable to get branched.
michaelmrose 7y ago
I have used a lot of distros. In order of stability from most to least. LTS -> Bleeding Edge -> 6 month release cycle distros Stuff like Ubuntu non LTS seems to break as much as bleeding edge but take longer to fix it. It's the worst of both worlds.

acqq 7y ago

It is surely not anecdotal and telling about "people I know" but the top comment of this thread for Lubuntu 20.04 LTS: "the Lubuntu team does not support upgrading from 18.04 or below to any greater release. Doing so will result in a broken system. If you are on 18.04 or below and would like to upgrade, please do a fresh install." Note that 18.04 was also LTS, so whoever tries to upgrade from one LTS to another, will probably be able to start the process (like before) but at the end will with huge probability be better off just biting the bullet... and fresh install. If the "people you know" upgrade faster then LTS to LTS they won't see a problem this time. But being able to upgrade from one LTS to the next LTS is completely reasonable user expectation. I don't even want to try to prove that it will be broken this time.

Avamander 7y ago
> but the top comment of this thread for Lubuntu 20.04 LTS: The one I replied to said Ubuntu not Lubuntu. Big difference.

c0l0 7y ago

No, Debian releases do not "break just as often". If you really couldn't got from release n to n+1 via apt(-get|itude) due to new packages migrating into testing, this would be a release-critical bug, and have to be corrected before the n+1 release were to be marked stable. There are certain situations where a Debian upgrade will break a specific package - maybe due to upstream messing up really badly, or maybe due to some unusual way of configuring it. But in that case, the release notes that Debian publishes for each release would cover that particular problem for sure. Mistakes happen, and noone's perfect - but Debian tries to be, and they're very near that ideal in terms of ensuring your ability to upgrade your installation.

dmz73 7y ago
Fir me Debian releases are broken to start with. Fresh install of 10.3 resulted in gnome desktop that could not use gui sudo and some package with broken dependencies. Replaced with xubuntu that just worked. This was not the first time I tried Debian with similar results. The "stable" part just means that they distribute an old version of some software and not that it all works.
waltpad 7y ago
I thought Debian also moved to a fixed schedule release policy? Doesn't it make it harder to stick to a "release when ready"? Personally, I don't think that Ubuntu is less perfect that Debian wrt. upgrade quality, it's just that (it seems to me that) the workforce is not as large, and that they also have other projects on their plate (not to say it should be that way or not, I'm merely trying to state the facts).
- pvorb 7y ago
  No, it makes "release when ready" easier, since the entire distribution doesn't have to wait for that single software release becau the next distro release is not that far away. At least that's how it works for Java. (I'm not that deep into Linux distros.)
  - waltpad 7y ago
    How is that supposed to work? I understand that it possible to pull the plug on packages which are not ready at time T, but it also means pulling the plug on all the packages that depend on it. So if libreoffice depends on package P, and that one is not ready, is Debian going to simply drop libreoffice until next release?
    - jlarocco 7y ago
      Nothing is dropped. At a very high level, it works like this: New versions of stuff go into Unstable. When they've been tested a while they get pushed to Testing. Periodically Testing is frozen and branched into a new Stable release. If a package doesn't make it into Testing before the freeze then it's out of luck and has to wait for the next release. For example, assume libreoffice 1.0 and libfoo 1.0 are in Unstable, Testing and Stable. If libreoffice 1.1 comes out and depends on libfoo 1.1, but libfoo 1.1 is broken in Unstable, then libfoo 1.1 and libreoffice 1.1 won't be pushed to Testing until the issue is fixed. If they don't make it into Testing before the release freeze then the next stable will ship with libreoffice 1.0. After the freeze, when the libfoo 1.1 is fixed in Unstable, then libreoffice 1.1 and libfoo 1.1 will go into Testing and wait for the next Stable to get branched.

michaelmrose 7y ago

I have used a lot of distros. In order of stability from most to least. LTS -> Bleeding Edge -> 6 month release cycle distros Stuff like Ubuntu non LTS seems to break as much as bleeding edge but take longer to fix it. It's the worst of both worlds.